What is the Correct Approach to Solving the Deuteron Transcendental Equation?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around solving a transcendental equation related to the deuteron in nuclear physics, specifically from a problem in Krane's textbook. Participants are exploring the relationship between parameters defined in the equation and their implications for the potential energy, \( V_o \).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to calculate the parameter \( b \) and its relation to the potential energy \( V_o \). There are questions regarding the physical dimensions of \( b \) and the conversion of energy units from MeV to Joules. Some participants are also verifying their calculations and discussing discrepancies in their results.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants sharing their calculated values for \( b \) and \( V_o \). There is recognition of differing results, prompting further inquiry into the assumptions and values used in calculations. Some guidance has been offered regarding unit conversions and the physical interpretation of parameters.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of the problem as presented in the textbook, with specific values for mass and energy provided. There is an emphasis on ensuring the correct interpretation of these values in the context of the transcendental equation.

James_1978
Messages
34
Reaction score
3
Homework Statement
I believe I solved the transcendental equation but the plot does not make sense.
Relevant Equations
##k_{1} \cot{k_{1}R} = -k_{2}##
##k_{1} = \frac{\sqrt{2m(E+V_{o})}}{\hbar}##
##k_{2} = \frac{\sqrt{-2mE}}{\hbar}##
##x = -\tan{bx}##
##x = \sqrt{\frac{-(V_{o} + E)}{E}}##
Dear Forum,

I am trying to solve a problem (4.6) from the introductory nuclear physics textbook by Krane. The problem is as follows:
Solving the deuteron using the radial equations gives the transcendental function,

##k_{1} \cot{k_{1}R} = -k_{2}##

Were

##k_{1} = \frac{\sqrt{2m(E+V_{o})}}{\hbar}##

And

##k_{2} = \frac{\sqrt{-2mE}}{\hbar}##

That gives the relations between and R. Show that this equation can be written in the form,

##x = -\tan{bx}##

Where

##x = \sqrt{\frac{-(V_{o} + E)}{E}}##

Evaluate the parameter b for R = 2fm. Note that is the reduced mass. Solve the transcendental equation.

When rearranging we get ##b## as.

##b = \frac{\sqrt{-2mE}}{\hbar}*R##

For the reduced mass ##m = \frac{1.67x10^{-27}}{2} kg##
For ##\hbar = 1.054x10^{-34} J-s##
For ##E = -2.22 MeV##

We are suppose to see that when solving the transcendental equation we get ##V_{o} = 36 MeV##. However we must have something wrong because the function does not clearly show how you infer the ##V_{o} = 36 MeV##. Any help is appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How much value of b you get ? Please let me know it for checking your result.
 
Last edited:
Dear Anuttarasmmyak

Here is what I got for b

##b = \frac{\sqrt{-2*\frac{1.67x10^{-27}}{2}*-2.22*1.602x10^{-13}}}{1.054x10^{-34}}##

Where ##b =2.3155x10^{14} m^{-1}##

Or with R I get ##b*R = 0.4856## I get ##V_{o} = 36##. I think this is correct. Just wanted to make sure.

1676640075854.png
 
b has no physical dimension.
 
Yes. I saw that. b*R is unit-less. My mistake.
 
Is MeV translated to MKSA Joule ?
 
Yes. I think you are asking in that I multiplied MeV*1.602x10^-13 to convert MeV to Joules. Is that what you are asking?
 
And you say R is 2 fm.
 
Yes, I use 2x10-15 m.
 
  • #10
James_1978 said:
Or with R I get
So you say b=0.4856.
 
  • #11
Yes. That is what I got.
 
  • #13
anuttarasammyak said:
So you say b=0.4856.
James_1978 said:
Yes. That is what I got.
I got a different value for ##b##. I calculated ##b=0.4627##.
 
  • #14
What did you use for E and mass of proton?
 
  • #15
I first calculated ##b## using the numbers you used and got a different answer. So I looked up the mass of a proton and neutron and found the reduced mass (##1.673\times 10^{-27}~\rm kg##) and used that to get the number above. Either way, I didn't get the value for ##b## you found. In both cases I used ##E_1 = -2.22~\rm MeV##.

In fact, I don't get the same values for the calculations you showed in post #3 for ##b## (really ##b/R##) or ##b R## (really ##b##). Moreover, your two values don't make sense if you're using ##R=2~\rm fm##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
5K